Author: James T. Walker
Date: 15:57:35 09/13/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 13, 1999 at 05:51:40, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On September 12, 1999 at 09:15:06, James T. Walker wrote: > >>This game was finished the morning I left on my trip and forgotten about untill >>now. This will be the final game since there seems to be no interest in this >>match. >> I think it's obvious that CSTal-2 is not in the same league with the top >>programs (IMHO). > >this is a shallow evaluation. In my games against Hiarcs7.32 CSTal >gets 50%-. >You now say that it is not in the same league as crafty is. >But hiarcs is stronger than crafty! >How can you evaluate something this way ?? >Maybe cstal2 does not like the actual crafty version for whatever reason? >But YOUR conclusion is unprofessional. ************************ Hello Thorsten, One of the advantages I enjoy while testing Chess programs is that I am not attached to any program either officially,financially or otherwise. I have no need to be "Professional". I do have a right to my opinion. I have also played CSTal-2 vs Hiarcs and the results were only 2-0 for Hiarcs. I admit that CSTal-2 does play a much better game at 40/2 than at game/5 minutes but it still comes up short when compared to other top commercial programs. It is pointless to argue with you since you are biased and cannot see the facts clearly. My opinion is only based on the games I have seen both while playing computer vs computer and watching CSTal-2 on ICC vs GM/Masters and even 1800 players. I admit that most of the games are fast time controls and this is a disadvantage to CSTal even on a K6-3-450/256 Meg. I like the interface very much as I have said many times. I like many functions which I would LOVE if they worked perfectly. The simple fact is the program comes up short in the strength department when compared to the top commercial programs. It's true that for most consumers that should not be a major factor since it can beat about 95% of all chess players at either blitz or standard time controls. Perhaps to some the style it plays makes up for the failed attacks. It's sometimes brilliant attacking style can on occasion be exciting to watch. Just as it's strength is not the main reason for buying CSTal-2 it also should not be a reason for not buying it. The ICC interface & auto232 functions make the program worth the price (To me). I use it as my main interface when playing on FICS because I like it better than winboard. You should not take it personal when people say the strength is not as strong as the top commercial programs. It should be taken as constructive criticism and spur Chris & company to improve the program in this area. Chris himself once told me the program is inefficient and needs rewriting. Lets face it, 10-12K/ns on a K6-3-450 is very slow by todays standards. Jim Walker **************** > > > > > >>Program 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total >>Crafty 16.15 W.5 B1 B1 W0 B.5 W1 B1 W1 6 >>CSTal-2 B.5 W0 W0 B1 W.5 B0 W0 B0 2 > >when you write cstal2 , which version do you refer to ?? >When you write crafty your precisely write down the version number... > >which machines (mhz) ?
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.